Varsity sports with the Burlington Free Press sports department

Week 3 football power rankings

Undefeated Lyndon ran for more than 400 yards on the ground in last week’s win at Milton. The VIkings are fifth in this week’s Varsity Insider football power rankings. EMILY McMANAMY/FREE PRESS

South Burlington jumps to No. 2 and Lyndon makes a moves into the top 5 — two teams who climbed in this week’s football power rankings.

Did I get it right? Let me know and offer your own rankings and thoughts in the comment section below.

QPR standings and this week’s schedule are below rankings.

Enjoy.

Through Week 3

1. Middlebury (3-0): The Tigers pulled away at Colchester behind the rushing duo of Nicholas Felkl (156) and Jacob Trautwein to maintain top billing in this week’s power rankings. Middlebury has allowed just 13 points in three games (and scored 86 offensively in that span). Last week: 1.

2. South Burlington (3-0): Another week, another rout – and another bigtime performance from Tanner Contois, who totaled 210 rushing yards and four touchdowns in the 42-6 victory at Brattleboro. Last week: 3.

3. Hartford (1-1): The Hurricanes fell to Catholic Memorial in an out-of-state contest that doesn’t count in the standings — and I think SBHS has done enough to make the leap past the defending champs this week. Hartford has its home opener Friday, playing host to Brattleboro. Last week: 2.

4. Champlain Valley (3-0): The defense has kept the CVU in games early; then the offense gets rolling some time after the half. This is a dangerous team if the offense can find its groove from the onset. Last week: 4.

5. Lyndon (3-0): The Vikings’ strong rushing attack was impressive in Friday’s win at Milton. Lyndon controlled the line and moved the chains methodically. What wasn’t impressive, however, was the nonstop chirping before and after plays. Milton made its own mistakes with unsportsmanlike penalties, but Lyndon drew a couple as it ran out the clock of a 28-0 win. Will Lyndon, a favorite in D-II, remain focused in tighter games? Last week: 7.

6. BFA-St. Albans (2-1): As Shawn Corrow wrote, the Bobwhites were the ones who couldn’t get going in the rainy conditions of last week’s loss to Essex. Can BFA regroup on the road against high-powered South Burlington? Last week: 5.

7. Rutland (2-0):The Raiders squeaked out a victory against winless Mount Anthony. Too harsh to drop them a spot in the week’s rankings? Perhaps, but the Raiders play host to Middlebury this weekend. Last week: 6.

8. Mount Mansfield (2-1):The Cougars are an overtime away from being undefeated. Still, their record is a promising start for a senior-heavy, run-first group that travels to 1-2 BHS this week. Last week: 8.

9. Woodstock (3-0): In a matchup of Division III unbeatens, the Wasps showed why they are still at the top. Oliver Kaija had five TDs and the defense forced six turnovers in topping U-32 35-0. The showdown with Mill River looms in Week 5. Last week: 9.

QPR standings
*Win-loss record, QPR number in parenthesis
* The QPR formula (Quality Point Rating) determines playoff seedings for each division
*Top 8 in Division I and III advance to postseason; top 4 qualify for tournament play in D-II

Friday’s games
Games at 7 p.m.
Mount Mansfield at Burlington
BFA-St. Albans at South Burlington
U-32 at Winooski
Colchester at Essex
Milton at Fair Haven
Middlebury at Rutland
Brattleboro at Hartford
Oxbow at Woodstock
Mill River at Springfield
Burr and Burton at Mount Anthony

Saturday’s games
Games at 1 p.m.
St. Johnsbury at Champlain Valley
Rice Memorial at Lyndon
North Country at Bellows Falls
Windsor at BFA-Fairfax
Spaulding at Mount Abraham
Mount St. Joseph at Poultney

Share this:

About Alex Abrami

I've been working in the Burlington Free Press sports department as a copy editor and writer since Sept. 2007. I've been covering Vt. sports for the BFP since 2001. I also spent a year at the Times Argus in Barre (2004-05).
I played soccer and ran track and field at Rice Memorial High School before I studied Journalism & Mass Communications at St. Michael's College.
My love of high school sports, journalism and Vermont life has kept me in the Green Mountain state despite my sworn allegiance to New York teams: the Yankees, Giants, Knicks and Rangers.
If anyone has a story idea or a question, please don't hesitate to reach out to me.

145 Responses to Week 3 football power rankings

Yup watched the same game. Rice dominated for the first six minutes and from that point forward LI outscored them 36-0. LI needs to be ready because against a good team a slow start like that could be difficult to overcome.

I also agree with wearing the Rice kids out and being so much more physical. Not sure exactly but at least 6 times the game had to be stopped for several minutes or more so they could cart a Rice player off the field.

Listen all I said is I didn’t think it would be a cake walk …. and it was. I even went as far as to say good luck Vikings, and I would like to see them win. I did come out and identify myself as a “Rice Hater” Great job Viking TBT read all the way through would you!

I can just hear it now…”If Rice had Fitzgerald, that would have been a totally different game”. Another week’s worth of Lyndon hating coming up, I love it….but lets just remember, even though BBA is 3-1 and Lyndon crushed them, and even though Milton beat FH and Lyndon pounded them too, and even though they just got done steamrolling the defending champs…..Lyndon still hasn’t played anyone yet.

Point well taken that you did indeed wish them good luck and did identify yourself as not being a Rice fan. You have also been quite negative in your comments about Lyndon so aligning you with several others isn’t a stretch. Don’t take it personally as it’s a blog and some good ole back and forth makes it interesting….I know five minutes into the game I was thinking ooh I ain’t gonna run and hide on the blog if this keeps up. Was prepared to take my medicine, good or bad.

NEK You are right people may say that but no one will ever know and the fact of the matter is you play with the hand you’re dealt. I did come out and say last week until Lyndon beats a team like Rice they are the same 5-4 team they were last year well guess what now they are not they are the team to beat! And TBT I am not hiding.

Speaking of reading all the way through. I clearly stated if the Rice start to the game kept up I, yes I, not you, would not run and hide. I would’ve checked to the blog and taken my lumps. It’s not often that I am conciliatory but gave it a try….sorry you didn’t understand.

I will say this about the Vikings schedule for the second half of the season. Next week at home vs. Spaulding will be a snooze fest but after that it could be a grind. At Fair Haven, at Woodstock and home vs. STJA for “The Game” and finishing on the road at Bellows Falls.

Traveling 3 out of your last 4 games, and that home game being STJA which zaps a lot out of both teams it may not be as easy as thought. Not sure how the AD was thinking when he put this schedule together….couldn’t have been more brutal. Finishing 3 of 4 on the road and all serious hikes from Lyndon against the leagues best teams….ah may want to rethink the scheduling strategy Einstein.

TBT: The VIFL has a person that does the scheduling, not the ADs. It is usually set up in 2 year cycles, so you may travel the 1st year, but get the home game the next season. A lot of talk here on a D4 league. I agree. Maybe a 5 team league, play each other 2 times, home and away, then the playoffs. It will keep those smaller programs alive and maybe then there will be a couple of new programs started up. Question : when a team gets ahead by 35 points in the 2nd half, do BOTH coaches have to agree to ‘running time’ ?

I agree with MMQ. How much fun can it be for those kids in D-3 and other consistently weak programs to go to practice Monday thru Friday knowing they are probably going to get beat up ? I don’t think an 8 man league again is the answer.
Problem is unless there is a special meeting after this season there will be no change until the 2015 season. We are in the first year of a two year cycle. I realize some of these schools and head coaches have a lot of pride but something needs to change .

Good point about the two-year cycle. But I’m not sure the coaches can’t sit down and change that if they acknowledge there is a problem here. OV is catching some flak here for going D-III, but the OV coach advocated at the last meeting for four divisions just to avoid the mismatches that are problematic and to help the smaller schools. A small D-IV worked before, and then a couple teams, led by U-32, surprised the majority of the D-IV coaches by showing up at the meeting with a three-division plan about 10 years ago, and that was that. Time to take another look.

I enjoy the discussion about divisions and who should be where. As I stated last fall when the current 2-year cycle was being developed I was only calling for Mt Abe-ergennes to move up to D2 and Springfield to slide back to D3. I would have been happy to have listened to the rationale for the changes that were made. I know football is unique in the fact that the youth leagues really dictate much of the high school team results. If there isn’t that strong feeder system in place no school can consistently succeed.Thus you have big schools like NC and Spaulding struggling in a division that shouldn’t even be in.

I know this was talked about before but someone mentioned that Woodstock should have been moved up . I agree. At least for one two year cycle. See how things play out. Pardon the pun. There was lots of talk about them being good enough last year to be able to beat all of the teams in D-2 and most in D-1. They appear to be almost as good as last year. And from what I have seen of D-2 this year they would certainly compete and probably be a top team . Same with OV. They played Rice and a few other teams very close last year. No reason for them to move down. D-2 would have 10 teams and a very even division. Milton showed Friday night beating FH at FH that anything can happen. MR would compete in D-2 in my opinion. Woodstock could very well be right where they are or close in D-2. Time to stop allowing these teams to dictate where they play.
Seems to me the Woodstock coaches would love the challenge of playing better schools . They aren’t gaining a thing beating up on D-3 teams that should be D-4 except filling up the trophy case. If I were the head coach I would be embarrassed .
If a team like Rice with the same number of students or less can compete and do well in D-2 so can Woodstock.
That’s my rant for the day.

Rice is a private school which takes in athletes at a large rate, while Woodstock is a small public school which is only getting smaller. Yes, they probably could compete in D2 last 2 years, but not consistently beyond that. As I said previously, Woodstock went to D2 before and got worn down by the bigger schools.

I respectfully disagree. Look at the teams that were in D-2 at the same time Woodstock was in D-2. Colchester, CVU, MMU and maybe even Middlebury because they had moved down after suffering some tough seasons. Even BFA and SBHS were in D-2 for awhile. Woodstock would compete in D-2 without much trouble. Of course they may not win every game like they have been or go undefeated. They would compete. Plain and simple. There is no way they would be a fish out of water even for two years in D-2.
Yes Rice is a private school but year in and year out the student body hovers in the 380-400 number much like Woodstocks. That’s an average of 95 students per class. They have boys playing soccer and boys not playing. Just like other schools. Just because they are a private school doesn’t mean kids go there to play sports. I believe that’s a lame excuse for comparing them to Woodstock.
They’ve won back to back titles and looks like they’ll win another without much trouble. How many titles have the won in D-3 over the last 12-15 years? 10? 11 ?
How many titles has Rice won in the same time frame? 3 ?
Of course the schedule will be tougher. Isn’t that what football is? If it was easy more kids would be playing.
Sorry but its time for the Woodstock Wasps to move up .

Shep 7 you are totally wrong, school size plays a huge part in being successful. In every state the size of the school puts them in a respective division, vt should be no different. Your going to tell me a school like mt abe, verg thats has a combined 500 boys with 50 total players, can have their frosh and sophs play a full jv schedule against kids there own age and size does not have an advantage of most the small schools in D3 where there same frosh and sophs either have to start so they can field a team and go up against jr and sr or rarely see the field in a given year? If you think size of school does not matter then your nuts because its a huge factor, its simple math.

Football – It really only matters because of numbers. They can have 500 boys in the school and 50-60 boys in the program. But if they don’t have kids that can play and play well they can have 70 boys and it really doesn’t matter.
But I do hear what you are saying. They do have a better chance of having better players with more numbers. But it really isn’t simple math.

From what I have been told by a former player, Woodstock won 3 games in the two years they were in D 2. According to him, they have no feeder program, no coop and have rarely had numbers over 35 or play JV games. He said his last season, they won the D-3 championship game with 24 players. It seems, they are a small school playing other small schools? Yes/no. Looks to me, that every division has it’s strong programs and weak ones year in and year out. I think football in Vermont would be better served by schools working on ways to get better rather than trying to constantly adjusting divisions. Even if a D-4 is created using school size as a criteria, Woodstock would probably be in it.

Old owl. Sorry but we are not living in 2006 anymore. As I stated Woodstock may have ben out of their element playing in D-2 at that time because they were up against much larger schools like Colchester and the like. Times have changed in the few years. Those schools have moved up to D-1. Woodstock has dominated the last two plus years. Look at the rosters of the D-2 schools. Many have freshman listed . many have sophmores, and juniors dressing on the rosters that will only see the field in the last two minutes if they are lucky. Most schools in D-2 might have 15 kids that actually play and they play both ways. Sorry I’m not buying they only have 24 kids on the roster. Look around. Its the same with many programs. And play in a D-4 program if they had one? No disrespect but you must not watch much high school football.

I’ve been saying that same thing the last couple of years. And I always hear the same stuff. Poor Woodstock just can’t compete. But what happens ? They win the D-3 title undefeated and back to back. For a program that was suppose to lose a bunch of key players they sure replenished without skipping a beat. They are blowing everybody out again this year . Even if they lose to Lyndon by 20 or more they would most likely beat every other team in D-2. So big deal they don’t win the title. Is that the only reason they won’t move up? Does it have to be carved in stone Woodstock wins or they stay in D-3 ?

this season with so many inter-divisional games is and will show that there isn’t much of a gap betweenD2 and the upper half of D3.The points about the D2 of 10 years ago are spot on.Many of the larger schools were moved to D1 where they belonged. I have always respected many of the southern schools and their tremendous community support it is indeed a part of the culture.Without all the big dogs I surely believe Woodstock and Mill River etc would do just fine in D2 .Bellows Falls proves that point every season.

OK, I admit that I don’t see alot of HS games. The Fan is correct. Some though. But “dominate” and “blow out” being subjective analysis, can anyone tell me in objectively terms, what makes Woodstock a D-2 football school and Mill River, U-32, Otter Valley and Mt Abe not? Size of school, numbers of players, feeder programs?

Mainly size of school. But NC hasn’t competed in D-2 in at least three years. U-32 moved down and still can’t compete. Spaulding moved down and I think they scored the first points of the season Saturday.

That’s it? Of those D3 school mentioned, I think Woodstock is the smallest. I had to laugh though when FNL said “poor Woodstock”. I have never heard anyone ever say that before. Another observation of this blog’s comments is the Rice recruiting gripe. No one here ever talks about LI, BB or St J. They don’t? If the VPA allows academy schools to compete with public schools, and they do, recruiting is an accepted fact of life. Rice is just playing by the accepted rules . Ski schools are the real interesting ones, although none play football.

Vt High School Football Fan – The reason Colchester, CVU, MMU, etc. were playing in D2 in 2006 was they were not good enough to be in D1. There programs have improved to the point were now they can. Respectfully, your logic is flawed.

Woodstock had very few games that weren’t close in 2011, they lost the first two that year at Fairfax and at Mt. Abe. They also had down to the wire games with Mill River, and Winooski. The only blowouts that year were Oxbow, MSJ, and Poultney.

Anyone remember a few years ago when CVU was attempting to stay in DIII because ‘they hadn’t won anything yet’? They were moved to DII kicking and screaming with their sixty players and played in the DII championship. If anyone thinks roster size has nothing to do with success in the lower divisions you are crazy. Back to back weeks, Mt Abe beats Winooski and Fairfax. MAU dressed 40 players and Winooski had 17 dressed and Fairfax 20….Vergennes adds 18 players to MAU’s roster and they have a full JV schedule. Winooski, Fairfax and other ‘legit’ DIII schools do not have the ability to develop younger players because they cannot play against their peers in games. MAU playing in DIII is simply ridiculous, along with U32 and Otter Valley…DII schools in every other sport. Things need to change or there will be more schools dropping football in the next two years.

Everyone is confused. SCHOOL SIZE IS DIFFERENT THAN # KIDS IN A PROGRAM!!!

Midd / Hartford are not big schools but there program numbers are huge because of very successful and independent youth programs. Hartford has 33 freshmen this year as a result of a hugely successful Mini Canes Program. Middlebury has 26 freshmen this year like usual. Its my understanding that Middlebury has opted to continue to keep their youth program independent of the Chittenden County and Southern Vermont Tackle youth programs and keep theirs as a flag program. Apparently The tigers and canes have found a system of success and the other larger schools should take some notes. (oh by the way… they run the ball and play defense and as a result are in the mix almost every year)

Agree with Shep 7, also the canes keep a secret of playing in the granite state football league at 7th and 8th grade, the only VT school to do so I believe, this program is a huge benefit for them word has it. Middlebury has been smart to keep the programs running as they have, the success shows. These 2 programs will be very tough to beat in the next few years…

Divisions? It really is simple:
-Align the divisions by school male enrollment.

- Insist on holding coaches accountable for knowing what they are doing. (There are far too many coaches in VT who do not know how to coach at the HS level.)

-Play ball.

Do youthink Texas, Florida, Ohio, even Mass. allow coaches who can’t compete to retain their positions? Superior coaching will take any program to the top. But is it fair to the five 170 pound kids from a small school have to face off against five 250 pound kids from the big schools week in and week out. Division alignment should be about player safety, not winning and being competitive. Get better coaches to address those issues and stop complaining about the successfull teams being successfull. I mean it really is absurd.

I hear people talking about Woodstock having superior talent, and yet it has been more than a decade since another boys winter or spring sport has won. Basketball won in the 90′s with a coach who was very successful at a smaller school before coming to Woodstock, when he left the program fell. Hockey won when they had a coach who played and Coached at Dartmouth, when he left the program fell. Lax won when they had a coach who played at Dartmouth, coached in the elite prep schools in CT then came to Woodstock, when he left the program fell. Woodstock football had a coach who previously coached college and then in CT high schools. The two coaches calling this years defense and offense coached with him for the last 15 plus years and they are doing the same stuff, i.e. coaching defense and running the ball. AKA what NH does every year in the Shrine.

Oh look a wiggly worm hovering just off the bottom of this lake. That’s so tempting…

I won’t take the bait, and will avoid calling out individuals, but teams that run a different defense/offense from week to week, rely on one player for their success, go for it multiple times on forth down, 1st quarter, inside their own territory would be a good starting point.

I think there is a difference between a “talented athelete” and a “talented football player”. Talented atheletes come and go but talented football players are created by well run “programs” and by good coaching. I also believe the best coaches have the best “programs”. It is part of the job and in football, unlike other sports, there are no short-cuts to success (recruiting already developed players from other programs).

Observer
Agree with you you about the coaching staff having to be accountable. Some schools have a policy that give preference to teachers applying for positions for athletics to move to the front of the line. This creates a situation that hampers the development of a program if a coach is only doing this to supplement their income. Teachers salaries have increased over the years so I don’t think this policy should be used by school districts. I am not going to deal with the division alignment but in any sport for a high school to be successful a city/town/school districts must have great feeder programs or athletes will not have the skills they need to be successful no matter how physically gifted they are. Those coaches or program supporters who create a great youth development opportunities will succeed. Those coaches who do not involve themselves with the youth programs are going to create a flawed program that will lead to mediocrity I’m not talking just about football as no matter the division some schools rise to the top year after year. Unfortunately we also need to talk about student athletes at some point in their life having to make a decession about what camps they are going to attend to help them develop their skill set and if their parents can afford to send them to those camps. Observer you site some other Woodstock programs that have faulted over the years due to coaching changes including lacrosse. Outside of football this is the second best team sport to watch. Your right for years it seemed that Woodstock and Middlebury played in every final at DI. This is directly linked to the youth programs these schools had. In the early years Woodstock had to search out teams to play whether they where prep schools or out of state. They still have a great youth program but all the other DI schools have caught up. Lacrosse is the fastest growing sport and now everyone else has their elementary school/rec programs prepping kids. For all those people yelling at Woodstock to move up in football the lacrosse has stayed in DI and by far is the smallest school

Sorry Ole chap but it isn’t just about the coaching. The hope is a good and qualified coach gets the best out of his/her athletes and teams, motivates them, provides skill development, better understanding of the game and how to play it. Most importantly teach life skills and create better student-athletes that are more prepared to enter the community after high school.

Feeder programs are the key to success in conjunction with solid coaching with consistency, meaning little turnover in coaches, at the youth levels. Building a tradition where it attracts the community, student population, media and the biggest, strongest and fastest athletes. Being a part of something bigger than themselves!

Coaching comes in with the talent level. A poor coach takes and average team and keeps them average or worse, a good coach makes the team achieve above average or more and so forth. Poor coach makes a poor team worse or the same, where a good coach gets that poor team to above poor to average. Great coaches take good and great teams and make them very good or superior where poor coaches keep them idle at best. Get the best out of ‘em!

Proof is in the puddin’ my friends as many coaches don’t put the time in to invest in a feeder program, consistent and knowledgeable youth coaches and building a program and they will come. Those that do win and those that don’t win occasionally and others consistently lose. Most coaches regardless of sport fall in the middle.

Winning consistently comes with talent more than coaching! Coaching builds talent consistently so the ups in downs in their talent cycle looks more like the plains than the Green Mtns, lol. Btw coaches can’t do this on their own, especially H.S. that are making a stipend that generally pays for their gas, food, time and monetary support of underprivileged student-athletes(I used to coach and a stop at McD’s cost me $25-30 each time, minimally). Coaches need parents, community members, other school staff, their football staff and the administration to buy in and build the program and tradition. Good coaches understand this and get it done cooperatively, poor to average coaches just ride the Green Mtn wave hoping that the occasional winning year keeps the mommies and daddies away from the AD…..we all know I mean there.